To prevent portable articles such as notebook computers from being stolen, there are many theft-deterrent locks being developed and introduced on the market. The most commonly used lock includes a lock head connecting to a steel cable. The lock head may be latched on the computer case, while the steel cable may be chained to a stationary object such as a table leg or a post.
Many references can be found in the prior art regard the techniques of the computer lock. For instance, R.O.C. patent publication No. 434556 entitled “Lock for computer equipment” discloses a lock structure that targets the insertion hole of the computer case. It adopts a design that can achieve the locking condition from the unlocking condition without using keys. FIGS. 5 and 6 of that patent show that the lock includes a case, a core, a face plate, a coupling ring, a latch bolt and a pin. The latch bolt bridges two clamping members at the front end of the core and is integrated with the core. The pin runs through the core and is turnable in a co-axial manner therewith, and may be moved by the case to change the relative position of the pin and the latch bolt, thereby to form different angular alterations of the front ends of the pin and latch bolt and result in “--shaped” and “cross-shaped” combinations to be inserted into or removed from the insertion hole, and may form a locking condition once inserted into the insertion hole.
In the cited reference the relative angular positions of the latch bolt and the pin may be changed through the movements of the core and case. However the rotation center must be on the same axis. To prevent the interference during relative movements, the latch bolt has to be carved to form a hollow interior to couple with the pin in a staggered manner. Hence to avoid the interference between the latch bolt and the pin during operation, a complicated shape has to be adopted. As a result, fabrication and assembly are difficult and tedious.
Moreover, the latch bolt is clamped by two fingers extended from the front end of the core and moved with the core in an integrated manner. If the interval between the two fingers were not adequate, coupling of the latch bolt and the core is difficult or impossible. On the other hand, if the coupling allowance were too large, a gap will be formed to result in a undesirable moving relationship between the core and the latch bolt. All of this could make locking and unlocking operations unreliable. Hence there is still room for improvement for the cited reference in terms of structural design and operation.